Proportionality in company penalty quantification requires aggravating and mitigating factors; mechanical multiplication of director liability is impe...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3261 to 3280 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that denial of cross-examination did not vitiate the assessment where the proceedings under section 153C were founded on seized loose sheets recovered during search, not on the statement of the person whose cross-examination was sought. Applying Andaman Timber Industries, the Court found that the statement was only corroborative and was not used as the basis of the assessment or penalty. As the impugned orders rested on seized material and not on the disputed statement, no procedural irregularity or breach of natural justice was made out. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.
HC held that denial of cross-examination did not vitiate the assessment where the proceedings under section 153C were founded on seized loose sheets recovered during search, not on the statement of the person whose cross-examination was sought. Applying Andaman Timber Industries, the Court found that the statement was only corroborative and was not used as the basis of the assessment or penalty. As the impugned orders rested on seized material and not on the disputed statement, no procedural irregularity or breach of natural justice was made out. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
